What McCain Should Do, Vol. I

You're plummeting the national polls. You're hemorrhaging support in the swing states. If the election were held today, your rival would win 364 electoral votes--the highest tally since 1980 for a non-incumbent in a two-way contest. And your name, unfortunately, is John McCain.

What do you do?

Frankly, the 2008 election is getting a little boring--especially for a blogger like me. Of course, "twenty-six days is an eternity in politics," so "anything could happen."  I know that. But right now, it seems like every new development favors the senator from Illinois. Gallup Gives Obama an 11-Point Lead! Obama Outspending McCain Three-to-One in Battleground States! Esquire Names Obama 'Sexiest Woman Alive'! I made that last one up. But you get my drift. It's like MTV's "The Hills"--there's the illusion of drama, but nothing's going on.

That's why we here at Stumper headquarters are launching a new series called "What McCain Should Do." For the next month or so--or until McCain actually does something that, ahem, works--we'll scour the web and raid our Rolodex to bring you the smartest and savviest in armchair quarterbacking. There's no shortage of unsolicited advice flying around out there. But our goal is to highlight stuff that actually makes some sense.

Up first: Ross Douthat of the Atlantic. Ross is the co-author of "Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream"; I interviewed him back in July about why the GOP should emphasize policies that link economic security to family values. Like me, Ross thinks that the Bill Ayers attack--which McCain is hitting even harder today, releasing a new web ad and "respond[ing] with gusto" to a question from FOX News on the subject--is a dead end. Also like me, Ross believes that McCain would benefit if economically struggling voters were to associate a positive, forward-looking relief plan with his candidacy. Unlike me, however, Ross has actually explained how he thinks McCain should proceed. 

Here's what he has to say:

Six words: Aggressive pandering to the middle class...

The next time the stock market has a really bad day (i.e., tomorrow), he should "huddle with his advisers" and announce that in light of the epic crisis, he's going to postpone his entire domestic agenda (such as it is) for, say, two years in favor of a short-term but expensive stimulus package aimed directly at the middle and working class. Last night's "homeownership resurgence plan"--which was the best pander he's produced since the financial crisis started--could be part of this package, but it should take a back seat to a proposal for short-term and substantial middle-class tax relief. The crisis is taking money out of people's pockets; McCain should promise to put a lot of money right back into them, and to do so immediately, with as large a tax rebate as he thinks he can propose without the media laughing him to scorn.

And at the same time, he should promise that every dollar the federal government earns off the bailout, every dollar saved from cutting earmarks, and every dollar saved as we draw down into Iraq, will go directly into some other pander-iffic proposal--like, say, an emergency relief fund for retirees whose 401(k)s have lost more than some specific percentage of their value in the last month. Wrap it all in a bow, call it a "Bailout for Main Street," and put as much energy into selling it as they've put into trying to rebrand Barack Obama as radical, vacuous, unready to lead. (And yes, they can still talk about Ayers, too.)

Is this cynical and opportunistic? Sure. Would it please the conservative intelligentsia? Quite possibly not. Would it look like just another desperation move, one that undercuts McCain's spending-hawk brand and gets mocked roundly in the press? Quite possibly. But... while four weeks of aggressive pandering to the middle class probably wouldn't win him this election, it's a strategy that has the virtue of actually addressing itself to the massive, massive anxieties that Americans are experiencing at the moment, as opposed to addressing itself to issues that voters, I suspect, perceive as tangential at best.

I'm inclined to agree. Right now, voters are far more concerned about their own economic security than some guy Obama crossed paths with in Chicago. By introducing a "Bailout for Main Street"--whatever its merits--McCain would be telling the American people that he a) cares about their struggles, b) will do whatever it takes to help and c) would be a bolder president than Obama. Of course, he can continue to try to disqualify his opponent. But at this point, I suspect that a positive, proactive economic message stands a better chance of resonating with voters who've yet to make up their minds than, you know, "Obama is palling around with terrorists."

Thoughts? Disagreements? Amendments? Ad hominem attacks? The comments are all yours.